9 ms·

I really think for the Oculus side of this, they should be on the hook for refunding a significant portion of the cost of the user's Oculus library when they ba

by zmmmmm 5y ago

I really think for the Oculus side of this, they should be on the hook for refunding a significant portion of the cost of the user's Oculus library when they ban the account. This would put the cost of a ban to Facebook for real users in the order of hundreds of dollars which is more than enough to have a support person do a realistic evaluation of the situation. It also reflects the non-recoverable portion of the cost to most users - you can sell the headset, but you can't transfer the value of the library to anybody. That is a straight up and very significant financial loss. While other aspects of the ban policy are obviously still very problematic, the fact that an arbitrary ban that is caused by actions outside the user's control can result in hundreds of dollars of losses sits at a whole different level and should be legally problematic for Facebook.

judge2020 5y ago
This is another good part of steam - even if your account is banned from the entire community for site-wide spam, you don’t lose access to your game library.
- judge2020 5y ago
  Edit: looks like, of course, they can ban you and lose access to your games, however it requires threatening legal action against Valve. https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2020/06/steam-user-loses-game-library-after-valve-perma-bans-him-for-extreme-racism/ https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2020/06/steam-user-loses-game-... Looks like this user received this message[0] after being banned from the community and only because he mentioned russian law did Steam suspend his account. > Going to support and blalblab again my rights and the russian law, they slapped me with a perma community ban and 1 month ban to contact the support. 0: https://i.imgur.com/uciPvDC.png https://i.imgur.com/uciPvDC.png
  - fuzxi 5y ago
    Generally speaking, you don't lose access to your Steam library unless you defraud them, e.g. by charging back purchases. I don't buy that the Russian guy got banned for spamming. The only evidence that that was the ban reason is his own words. Considering that this story seems to have only been picked up by sites like "oneangrygamer", "riseupgamer", and the Daily Stormer, I'd lay money he's not being honest.
loeg 5y ago
> refunding a significant portion of the cost of the user's Oculus library when they ban the account This incentivizes abusive behavior by users who want refunds, and cheapens the cost of abusive behavior. This mechanism was discussed in relation to OnlyFans somewhat recently -- creators that wanted to ban abusive "fans" had to refund them. (Unfortunately, I don't have a link handy.) The problem here is that Facebook couldn't tell OP had been impersonated by an abuser -- as you say, "actions outside the user's control."
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dkdk8283 5y ago
  That’s ok with me - FB has enough money.
  - creato 5y ago
    The problem being described is not FB losing money, it's grifters and scammers gaining money.
    - ruined 5y ago
      That's ok with me - grifters and scammers don't have enough money.
    - int_19h 5y ago
      That's preferable to non-grifters and non-scammers losing money.
- zmmmmm 5y ago
  Ok, so the scenario is I buy a headset, create a fake account, load up on games, then abuse the account to get all of it refunded so as to effectively have free use of the games for the period of time. But I still had to buy a headset, put in a real credit card, pass Facebooks initial "real identity" checks etc. With real human review and some basic policies to prevent repeat abuse this doesn't seem like something that would really open a wide level of abuse. Perhaps sporadic situations where the headset breaks the user decides its the easiest way to get all their purchases refunded.
SevenSigs 5y ago
> they should be on the hook for refunding a significant portion of the cost of the user's Oculus library If the purchases were < 6 months ago, I would do credit card charge backs...
RIMR 5y ago
Or have ban groups. Ban someone from having a Facebook profile, buying ads, sending Messages, or having an Instagram profile based on their behavior on those respective sections of the site. Maybe disable a person's multiplayer capabilities if they have a reputation for harassment. But let them keep their hardware running, and access their game library. Seems good for business, tbh. You might not want neo-nazis posting whatever they want on their profiles, but who cares if they're buying video games?
- zmmmmm 5y ago
  Yes, Facebook really doesn't have a convincing argument why they will not just disable the social interaction features when the ban is made on that basis. They will say that they want to build social features into all their software as integral and therefore it is not possible but it doesn't pass muster to me .... it simply isn't that hard to make it conditionally available within apps and if it is that hard then it is Facebook's fault for engineering it that way.
  - jtvjan 5y ago
    Perhaps they're trying to avoid a situation where banned people get a better experience because they don't have to deal with the social features.
aussieguy1234 5y ago
This is not a bad idea as long as Facebook is on the hook for the refunds, not the app developers.
- quickthrower2 5y ago
  Well it’s have to be both like any normal refund. Hopefully the % of refunds is small as it would be on way ebay or Amazon sales.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  Why?
quickthrower2 5y ago
Why are we buying this account-linked physical shit. Just pretend the headsets are not a viable product to purchase if they can be remotely bricked by a company you have no leverage over. Get a competitor product or go without.
- moolcool 5y ago
  Do you use a smartphone?
  - quickthrower2 5y ago
    Yeah smartphones are unfortunate since with COVID now you have to have one to check in in my country, but the second test is reputation. I’ve not heard of apple or android bricking a phone like this but FB/Google account bans and limitations are common. I guess we can’t be purist anymore but being pragmatic is still possible and you can divert funds away from FB this way to a company that cares about the headsets they sell and the user experience
  - grishka 5y ago
    You can disable Google services on Android. There's literally a button to do that if you know where to look.
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    My smartphone cannot be remotely turned into an overpriced wheel chock by someone in a call center.
    - throwaway2048 5y ago
      Apple at least can absolutely do this, that's what the purpose of reporting a device stolen is.
      - josephg 5y ago
        Apple also has phone numbers you can call with a human at the other end who can help resolve stuff like this.
PostThisTooFast 5y ago
This is why you should never buy devices that have to be tethered to a company's servers. Logitech Harmony remote users just learned this the hard way too. It means you can be ripped off at any moment. People need to stop voting for this offensive BS. Speaking of offensive: Two posts closer together than an hour and 10 minutes is "too fast" for this bullshit forum. Talk about offensive: They let you type out a question, comment, or reply and THEN say, NO, YOU CAN'T POST. First of all, fuck you HN. Second, FUCK YOU MORE for deliberately WASTING PEOPLE'S TIME by letting them invoke the comment function when you know you're not going to let them post. Unbelievable.
grishka 5y ago
> It also reflects the non-recoverable portion of the cost to most users And then people wonder why I'm never buying anything digital. That's the reason. Buying digital makes your continued access to the thing dependent on your account being not banned and the servers being up. In other words, even if you "own" it, you're still at the mercy of the seller. But if you bought something on a physical medium (or torrented), no one could take it away from you.
- exporectomy 5y ago
  Just think of it as like paying to see a movie. I bought a $10 app once, used it for what it was for, and now several phones later, I don't know or care what's happened to it. I got my value out of it and don't need to hoard every possession I "buy". Remember people who used to have a huge collection of video tapes or CDs? They hardly used them for anything except decoration of their living room. Hoarding old crap that you never use isn't the best use of money. Physical things can readily be taken away in divorces and debt recovery or less common things like police seizure if you're suspected of a crime. The world's richest man had half his wealth taken like that. Property rights aren't as secure as you think.
  - drdeca 5y ago
    Wow, I really disagree with this. Or, with the implication / point? Sure, if one buys a newspaper, chances are that one won’t hold on to it for long. But it is important that one can. If one wants to cut out a story from it and hold onto it, perhaps in a scrapbook, one can do so. It is also important for archival and preservation purposes.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - jnovek 5y ago
    You know, many people find collecting things to be a pleasant and relaxing hobby. Perhaps, for some people, having a large collection of tapes or CDs, displaying the collection is part of the point. People gather enjoyment from different types of things. Not everyone aspires towards minimalism.

by zmmmmm 5y ago

judge2020 5y ago

This is another good part of steam - even if your account is banned from the entire community for site-wide spam, you don’t lose access to your game library.

judge2020 5y ago
Edit: looks like, of course, they can ban you and lose access to your games, however it requires threatening legal action against Valve. https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2020/06/steam-user-loses-game-library-after-valve-perma-bans-him-for-extreme-racism/ https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2020/06/steam-user-loses-game-... Looks like this user received this message[0] after being banned from the community and only because he mentioned russian law did Steam suspend his account. > Going to support and blalblab again my rights and the russian law, they slapped me with a perma community ban and 1 month ban to contact the support. 0: https://i.imgur.com/uciPvDC.png https://i.imgur.com/uciPvDC.png
- fuzxi 5y ago
  Generally speaking, you don't lose access to your Steam library unless you defraud them, e.g. by charging back purchases. I don't buy that the Russian guy got banned for spamming. The only evidence that that was the ban reason is his own words. Considering that this story seems to have only been picked up by sites like "oneangrygamer", "riseupgamer", and the Daily Stormer, I'd lay money he's not being honest.

loeg 5y ago

> refunding a significant portion of the cost of the user's Oculus library when they ban the account This incentivizes abusive behavior by users who want refunds, and cheapens the cost of abusive behavior. This mechanism was discussed in relation to OnlyFans somewhat recently -- creators that wanted to ban abusive "fans" had to refund them. (Unfortunately, I don't have a link handy.) The problem here is that Facebook couldn't tell OP had been impersonated by an abuser -- as you say, "actions outside the user's control."

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dkdk8283 5y ago
That’s ok with me - FB has enough money.
- creato 5y ago
  The problem being described is not FB losing money, it's grifters and scammers gaining money.
  - ruined 5y ago
    That's ok with me - grifters and scammers don't have enough money.
  - int_19h 5y ago
    That's preferable to non-grifters and non-scammers losing money.
zmmmmm 5y ago
Ok, so the scenario is I buy a headset, create a fake account, load up on games, then abuse the account to get all of it refunded so as to effectively have free use of the games for the period of time. But I still had to buy a headset, put in a real credit card, pass Facebooks initial "real identity" checks etc. With real human review and some basic policies to prevent repeat abuse this doesn't seem like something that would really open a wide level of abuse. Perhaps sporadic situations where the headset breaks the user decides its the easiest way to get all their purchases refunded.

SevenSigs 5y ago

> they should be on the hook for refunding a significant portion of the cost of the user's Oculus library If the purchases were < 6 months ago, I would do credit card charge backs...

RIMR 5y ago

Or have ban groups. Ban someone from having a Facebook profile, buying ads, sending Messages, or having an Instagram profile based on their behavior on those respective sections of the site. Maybe disable a person's multiplayer capabilities if they have a reputation for harassment. But let them keep their hardware running, and access their game library. Seems good for business, tbh. You might not want neo-nazis posting whatever they want on their profiles, but who cares if they're buying video games?

zmmmmm 5y ago
Yes, Facebook really doesn't have a convincing argument why they will not just disable the social interaction features when the ban is made on that basis. They will say that they want to build social features into all their software as integral and therefore it is not possible but it doesn't pass muster to me .... it simply isn't that hard to make it conditionally available within apps and if it is that hard then it is Facebook's fault for engineering it that way.
- jtvjan 5y ago
  Perhaps they're trying to avoid a situation where banned people get a better experience because they don't have to deal with the social features.

aussieguy1234 5y ago

This is not a bad idea as long as Facebook is on the hook for the refunds, not the app developers.

quickthrower2 5y ago
Well it’s have to be both like any normal refund. Hopefully the % of refunds is small as it would be on way ebay or Amazon sales.
betwixthewires 5y ago
Why?

quickthrower2 5y ago

Why are we buying this account-linked physical shit. Just pretend the headsets are not a viable product to purchase if they can be remotely bricked by a company you have no leverage over. Get a competitor product or go without.

moolcool 5y ago
Do you use a smartphone?
- quickthrower2 5y ago
  Yeah smartphones are unfortunate since with COVID now you have to have one to check in in my country, but the second test is reputation. I’ve not heard of apple or android bricking a phone like this but FB/Google account bans and limitations are common. I guess we can’t be purist anymore but being pragmatic is still possible and you can divert funds away from FB this way to a company that cares about the headsets they sell and the user experience
- grishka 5y ago
  You can disable Google services on Android. There's literally a button to do that if you know where to look.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  My smartphone cannot be remotely turned into an overpriced wheel chock by someone in a call center.
  - throwaway2048 5y ago
    Apple at least can absolutely do this, that's what the purpose of reporting a device stolen is.
    - josephg 5y ago
      Apple also has phone numbers you can call with a human at the other end who can help resolve stuff like this.

PostThisTooFast 5y ago

This is why you should never buy devices that have to be tethered to a company's servers. Logitech Harmony remote users just learned this the hard way too. It means you can be ripped off at any moment. People need to stop voting for this offensive BS. Speaking of offensive: Two posts closer together than an hour and 10 minutes is "too fast" for this bullshit forum. Talk about offensive: They let you type out a question, comment, or reply and THEN say, NO, YOU CAN'T POST. First of all, fuck you HN. Second, FUCK YOU MORE for deliberately WASTING PEOPLE'S TIME by letting them invoke the comment function when you know you're not going to let them post. Unbelievable.

grishka 5y ago

> It also reflects the non-recoverable portion of the cost to most users And then people wonder why I'm never buying anything digital. That's the reason. Buying digital makes your continued access to the thing dependent on your account being not banned and the servers being up. In other words, even if you "own" it, you're still at the mercy of the seller. But if you bought something on a physical medium (or torrented), no one could take it away from you.

exporectomy 5y ago
Just think of it as like paying to see a movie. I bought a $10 app once, used it for what it was for, and now several phones later, I don't know or care what's happened to it. I got my value out of it and don't need to hoard every possession I "buy". Remember people who used to have a huge collection of video tapes or CDs? They hardly used them for anything except decoration of their living room. Hoarding old crap that you never use isn't the best use of money. Physical things can readily be taken away in divorces and debt recovery or less common things like police seizure if you're suspected of a crime. The world's richest man had half his wealth taken like that. Property rights aren't as secure as you think.
- drdeca 5y ago
  Wow, I really disagree with this. Or, with the implication / point? Sure, if one buys a newspaper, chances are that one won’t hold on to it for long. But it is important that one can. If one wants to cut out a story from it and hold onto it, perhaps in a scrapbook, one can do so. It is also important for archival and preservation purposes.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jnovek 5y ago
  You know, many people find collecting things to be a pleasant and relaxing hobby. Perhaps, for some people, having a large collection of tapes or CDs, displaying the collection is part of the point. People gather enjoyment from different types of things. Not everyone aspires towards minimalism.